SARAH VINE: Will mums now be jailed for banning PlayStation?

One of the children dropped my iPhone down the loo the other day. Or, at least, I think they did. I found it laid suspiciously on the towel rail in the morning, dry but unresponsive.

Normally I’m fairly relaxed about carelessness. Ribena on the sofa is part of the happy chaos of family life.

But the phone thing has driven me nuts. My life is on that wretched device. Neither of the little blighters owned up to the crime. And so I decided to punish them both. No PlayStation for the youngest, no TV for the eldest.

Mental cruelty? A so-called Cinderella Law seems so ill-conceived because acts like banning Playstation may be perceived as either emotional assault or legitimate discipline depending on your point of view (file image)

It was, of course, monstrously unfair on the innocent party. There was much wailing and gnashing of teeth.

But at least the next time my daughter sees her brother heading off to the loo looking suspicious, she’ll have the sense to tell me.

Certainly, if you had asked them if I was the meanest mum in the world, they would have agreed. At one point, my son even threatened to withhold my Mother’s Day card.

Emotional assault or legitimate parental discipline? It all depends on your point of view.

This is why the idea of a so-called Cinderella Law, which would see parents who deny their children affection face prosecution and possible imprisonment, seems so ill-conceived.

First, if such cases were to be prosecuted via the family courts, parents would have virtually no chance of defending themselves.

It is one of the great injustices of our time that these sessions are still conducted largely in secret and we hear of countless families being torn apart unnecessarily.

It would be all too easy for such a law to become another weapon for the state to use against families that failed to tick the right boxes.

Second, how are you going to prove ‘emotional’ abuse? It’s such an amorphous term, and one that’s bound to require armies of ‘expert’ witnesses to dispense their very dubious expertise.

And since the world is full of shrinks eager to identify childhood trauma as an excuse for practically every human failing, becoming a parent could end up being a seriously dangerous sport.

And how do you manage to establish abuse? Do you rely on the testimony of the ‘victims’ and their friends? What if the accuser happens to be a delinquent teenager — that most manipulative of species.

Then again, how do you define ‘neglect’? A baby left to cry in its cot because the parent is trying to get him or her used to a regular sleep pattern might easily be presented as emotional neglect.

As could not breast-feeding — especially if the NCT had a say in it. And what about the naughty step: emotional abuse or legitimate toddler taming? What say you, M’lud?

Anyway, why must we all be measured by the standards of the vilest in our society?

Just because some people are guilty
of criminal neglect of their children, that doesn’t mean the rest must
all be under suspicion.

The vast majority of parents only want the best for their children, even if they do drop their iPhones down the loo.

Failed: The real problem is that the authorities charged with protecting vulnerable children consistently fail to do their jobs properly. Had they done so, the likes of Victoria Climbie (left) and Baby P (right) may not have died

The minority of twisted individuals who inflict suffering on their offspring are criminals that the law already caters for. Provided, of course, they can be caught.

And there’s the rub. The real problem is not that the police and courts lack the legislative tools to prosecute; it’s the fact that the authorities charged with protecting vulnerable children consistently fail to do their jobs properly.

Had they done so, the likes of Victoria Climbie and Baby P may not have died.

It is that, not some ill-conceived new law, that will save the lives of future children at risk.

Like many, I’ve just shelled out £100 to pre-order England shirts for the children.

Useful for the players in Brazil. Less of an advantage during your average British summer.

Nicole's hair ads just won't wash

Who's she kidding? Nicole Scherzinger is the last in a long line of celebrities to endorse a product - in this case, a £1.99 bottle of Herbal Essences shampoo

Nicole Scherzinger is the last in a long line of celebrities to endorse a product - in this case, a £1.99 bottle of Herbal Essences shampoo.

Obviously if someone wants to pay her lots of money to wear a nice frock and fling her hair around a bit, she'd be mad not to.

But do women really fall for this stuff?

I mean, we're pretty gullible when it comes to lotions and potions, but we're not completely stupid.

Even I know it's been a very long time since Ms Scherzinger even washed her own hair, let alone did so using a budget supermarket brand.

Don't verb me!

In his book Strictly English, Simon Heffer talks about the ‘promiscuous mutation’ of nouns into verbs.

Books are authored, people are partnered. It’s all rather unsavoury.

Lately, though, I’ve noticed that it’s developed into a linguistic free-for-all.

I was recently ‘tasked’ with reviewing a TV script. Apparently, the producers were contemplating ‘cold-towelling’ the entire project.

Mr Heffer may have to get his cane out.

I like to kid myself that by not allowing my children to have smartphones, I am somehow protecting them from the worst excesses of the internet.

But then along comes the story of nine-year-old Rhiannon Scully, dared into downing a cocktail of whisky and vodka after watching a NekNomination video online, and I realise I’m wasting my time.

No parent can ever truly protect their child from the internet. It’s like one of those whack-a-mole arcade games: for every pest you squish, there are three waiting to pop up elsewhere.

NekNomination is just the latest incarnation of the vicious happy slapping craze that swept the nation a few years ago.

It, too, resulted in a number of deaths, as well as several rapes. Many of the victims, like Rhiannon, were young children.

Sometimes you wonder: at what point do we pull the plug?

I blame men for late life baby boom

Aged 35 when my first child was born, I was classified as a ‘geriatric’ mother on the notes at Queen Charlotte’s hospital in Hammersmith.

So goodness only knows what the technical term is for a pregnant woman in her 50s.

A few years ago, you wouldn’t have needed one. Now, it’s fast becoming a medical necessity, since the number of women having babies in their sixth decade has more than doubled in the past five years.

Rise: The number of women having babies in their sixth decade has more than doubled in the past five years

Part of the reason is that women are delaying motherhood for the sake of their careers. But there’s also another problem: men.

Specifically, the modern male’s lack of maturity, not to mention severe aversion to anything that looks, sounds or smells even vaguely like commitment.

I would have been quite happy to have had my nippers young. But could I find a man . . . well, man enough to raise children with? Not likely. Most of them couldn’t have been trusted with a goldfish.

'Women are delaying motherhood for the sake of their careers. But there's also another problem: men'

It wasn’t until my early 30s when, having jettisoned the last in a line of dithering narcissists, I finally came across someone grown up enough to contemplate starting a family with.

The solution, of course, is for parents to teach their little boys the importance of respect, reliability and commitment.

Plus, while they’re at it, good table manners, impeccable personal hygiene and the vital importance of leaving the bathroom exactly as you found it.

What a posh pout

I know Brooklyn Beckham is meant to be all mean and moody in his modelling debut for Man About Town magazine, but I just see a rather sweet little boy in a striped T-shirt who looks a lot like his mum - and even has the same familiar pout.

Debut: Brooklyn Beckham is meant to be mean and moody in his modelling debut for Man About Town magazine

After years of being teased by my husband for drinking ‘Girly Grey’ (aka Earl Grey) tea, it turns out the joke’s on him: the stuff’s good for your heart because of the bergamot in it.

I’m not so sure the same could be said of his brew of choice, Taylors Yorkshire tea, which he takes thicker than William Hague’s accent.

Real BBC's dafter than TV spoof

If you haven’t seen BBC2’s hilarious BBC spoof, W1A, brought to you by the makers of Olympic parody 2012 and starring many of the original cast (including Hugh Bonneville as the BBC’s new Head of Values), I urge you to.

It’s brilliant in every detail, from the hot-desking madness of New Broadcasting House to Simon Harwood’s scheming Director of Strategic Governance and Will Humphries’s dim-witted intern.

There’s even a female news presenter who bears an uncanny resemblance to Susanna Reid, who recently defected, along with her high-profile cleavage, to ITV.

Nothing compared to the real corporation: BBC2's hilarious BBC spoof, W1A, is brilliant in every detail

But all of this pales into insignificance compared to some of the actual things going on at the real BBC.

Such as the fact that acres of costly new carpet are being torn up because some staff felt they weren’t ‘creative’ enough.

Talk about life imitating art. But don’t worry.

I’m reliably informed that a committee has been set up to decide on a suitable flooring replacement.